This week in the FishTank we have two offerings for the anniversary. This
first submission is a complete story that addresses what it's like to wake
up in a bubble. It is 935 words. FishTank guidelines apply:
1) 2 positive comments
Positive: Okay, maybe it's just me, but this part struck me as very
vivid and very funny:
Would I have to
scratch, "Creation took eight days" on my thigh with
fingernail shards to alert humanity that we had owners?
Positive: And this part went very well with the whole beginning of the
story:
"I hate to burst your bubble," she drawled, "but it takes
way more than an hour to properly make love."
2) 2 suggestions for improvement
Improvement: I couldn't find anything overall to improve so I'm
resorting to being nitpicky.
I thought of it as The Bubble, because there was the
faintest hint of surface tension anywhere my body made
contact with it.
There shouldn't be a comma before the word "because."
Improvement: And no comma after the word "could" in this sentence:
I could, measure my heart rate and hear my own
voice and breathing.
Overall, an enjoyable story that really played with my imagination. :)
- Souvie
From: john
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 22 Jul 2002 22:10:51 -0700
Fish Tank: Tiny Bubbles by Gary Jordan
For a "day"dream it's quite elaborate; for any dream its way
ingenious. The fact it takes up 84.3% of the story is, I think, a
problem that needs a little work. The fact that it's so clever (not
to mention the quality of the writing which not surprisingly is
excellent) is certainly its strength. There is very little, though,
that bridges the giant dream to the sliver of reality; it hardly seems
fair. The reader hunkers down (in my case a little reluctantly) to
something sci fi and starts believing in the plot, just starts caring
about the conflict, when - bam - the bubble bursts and s/he must
shift into a charming slice of family romance. I'd be wont to blow a
technical - but loath to do it since there's so damn much flair. The
reality is just as apple pie as the fantasy is off the wall in centre
field. I think one needs a seatbelt for this one; it jars. Still a
little queasy, after I'd got both feet safely on the ground, I liked
it very much.
Thnak you, Gary!
John
From: dennyw
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 03:30:54 -0700
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:05:28 GMT, [email protected] (Souvie) held
forth, saying:
"I hate to burst your bubble," she drawled, "but it takes
way more than an hour to properly make love."
One quibbly thing: I've never known anyone who'd say 'to properly make
love' - but I have known those who'd say, 'to make love properly.'
-denny- (curmudgeon)
"There are two tragedies in life.
One is to lose your heart's desire. The other is to gain it."
- G.B. Shaw
From: Hammon Wry
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 11:47:29 GMT
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:05:28 GMT, [email protected] (Souvie) held
forth, saying:
"I hate to burst your bubble," she drawled, "but it takes
way more than an hour to properly make love."
One quibbly thing: I've never known anyone who'd say 'to properly make
love' - but I have known those who'd say, 'to make love properly.'
I haven't read the story, but consider this: If the above sentance is
spoken out loud, the word "properly" takes on a special emphasis if
placed before "make love", even without using any extra stress.
Especially if you add a US southern dialect drawl to it.
Hammon Wry
Thinks the most beauriful sounding sentance fragment in the English
language is: "The rose of sharon in bloom by the cellar door"
Erotica should be spoken out loud.
From: dennyw
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:20:18 -0700
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 11:47:29 GMT, Hammon Wry <[email protected]>
held forth, saying:
I haven't read the story,
Why ever not? It's shortish, and your comments would no doubt be
interesting.
<thinks: that's what the FT is for, after all>
-denny- (curmudgeon)
"There are two tragedies in life.
One is to lose your heart's desire. The other is to gain it."
- G.B. Shaw
From: Hammon Wry
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:13:57 GMT
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 11:47:29 GMT, Hammon Wry <[email protected]>
held forth, saying:
I haven't read the story,
Why ever not? It's shortish, and your comments would no doubt be
interesting.
<thinks: that's what the FT is for, after all>
Be happy to, if you'd provide me with direction on locating the Fish
Tank.
Hammon Wry
To mangle Mephistopheles:
The Fishtank has no limits, nor is circumscrib'd
In one self place; for where we are is the Fishtank,
And where the Fishtank is there must we ever be.
Or, more concisely, you're lookin' at it.
Or, more confusingly, http://www.asstr.org/~Desdmona/FishTank/base/
Clarify!? Waddaya mean I gotta clarify?
Oh, fine. Spoil my fun.
Desdmona posts Fishtank stories each week to ASSD, where anyone who
wants to can critique them. Periodically, she archives those critiques
at the above website for the edification of posterity.
So, if you want to critique a Fishtank story, by all means go ahead and
do so. If you want to submit something to the 'Tank (everything so far
has been fiction, but I'm confident poetry would be fine too), send it
to Des, and she'll put it in the queue.
-Vinnie [email protected]
http://www.asstr.org/~vinnie_tesla/
He polishes birds of the Vista
From: Desdmona
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 08:01:59 -0400
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 11:47:29 GMT, Hammon Wry <[email protected]>
held forth, saying:
I haven't read the story,
Why ever not? It's shortish, and your comments would no doubt be
interesting.
<thinks: that's what the FT is for, after all>
Be happy to, if you'd provide me with direction on locating the Fish
Tank.
Hammon Wry
To mangle Mephistopheles:
The Fishtank has no limits, nor is circumscrib'd
In one self place; for where we are is the Fishtank,
And where the Fishtank is there must we ever be.
Or, more concisely, you're lookin' at it.
Or, more confusingly, http://www.asstr.org/~Desdmona/FishTank/base/
Clarify!? Waddaya mean I gotta clarify?
Oh, fine. Spoil my fun.
Desdmona posts Fishtank stories each week to ASSD, where anyone who
wants to can critique them. Periodically, she archives those critiques
at the above website for the edification of posterity.
So, if you want to critique a Fishtank story, by all means go ahead and
do so. If you want to submit something to the 'Tank (everything so far
has been fiction, but I'm confident poetry would be fine too), send it
to Des, and she'll put it in the queue.
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:05:28 GMT, [email protected] (Souvie) held
forth, saying:
"I hate to burst your bubble," she drawled, "but it takes
way more than an hour to properly make love."
One quibbly thing: I've never known anyone who'd say 'to properly make
love' - but I have known those who'd say, 'to make love properly.'
I have. Maybe it comes from the northern/eastern european roots, I
don't know for sure. Some local grammatic structures are like classic
cases of odd dialect (not just accents).
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/
For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Leowulf
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 16:01:48 -0000
This week in the FishTank we have two offerings for the anniversary.
This first submission is a complete story that addresses what it's
like to wake up in a bubble. It is 935 words. FishTank guidelines
apply:
1) 2 positive comments
Well told, building suspense and resolution in a Twilight Zone sort of way.
The setting is minimalist enough to focus the reader's attention on the
meeting of the bubble people; by the time it happens, the reader cares
enough about the protagonist to make the union powerful from an emotional
perspective.
The teasing aspect of the story, building to a sex scene in the bubble that
is then denied the reader is a good technique. It builds interest and
tension, making the reader want more of the story
2) 2 suggestions for improvement
<in Marvin the Martian's voice> "Where's the sex scene? There was supposed
to be an earth-shattering sex scene!" Ending the story on the way to the
bedroom makes it a great teaser, but some in-story sex would also have made
a fun resolution to the tale.
I was going to give you some sewing thread to repair the infinitive that
the protagonist's wife split, but somebody else already mentioned it. <g>
3) Try not to repeat!
It's too hard not to! :) the story was a great teaser - I loved it!
Leowulf
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:23:30 -0500
This is a tricky one to comment on. The whole bubble thing is very
nicely done. Dreamy-real, giving insight into the character in an
interesting setting. I'm not energetic enough to pick through for
picky editorial technical details :-) but there isn't much else.
OK, I know it is trying to be short, but I've often found that the
dreamy sex bits seem to drag on a while. Not always, depends on mood
or whatever, but I seem to notice a few more details. Maybe Gary
doesn't want to show them in this story, but a little bit more - even
a bit of recognition of the advantage that mutual nudity has on making
an acquaintance - would make it feel better.
"I hate to burst your bubble," she drawled, "but it takes
way more than an hour to properly make love."
Now, of course she' s right, and he knows that too. But one of the
quick discoveries made about having kids is that a nice hour is better
than the longer time which might not come for a few days (or for those
of us who don't mind getting little sleep, until nightfall ;-)
It does make me wonder just what happened when they met. The bubble
situation seems kind of unlikely as a "real" thing, you know?
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/
For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Hammon Wry
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 02:40:37 GMT
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:30:45 -0400, "Desdmona" <[email protected]>
presented in the Fish Tank: Tiny Bubbles by Gary Jordan
My two praises:
Have you ever blown bubbles? Did you ever watch two bubbles
merge? How they touch and the surface tension creates a flat
spot between them and the area of contact grows until
suddenly they're one, big, wiggling bubble? That moment when
it happens, there's a sudden growth and a lot of shimmying
and shivering ...
yes, I have blown bubbles. This is a lovely bit, and I find it oddly
evocative of erotic. I guess it's the old "merging two into one"
metaphore.
When the new, larger Bubble stabilized, I pulled my head
back to see what - or who - I was attached to. She was the
most beautiful woman I had - have - ever seen. Somewhere in
the rational recesses of my mind, some objective snippet of
brain admitted not Sophia Loren beautiful, nor Meg Ryan
pretty. Maybe not even handsome. But to the rest of me, she
was goddess gorgeous. Looking into her eyes, I could tell
she felt the same about me.
I put my head against her neck and clung with all my might.
We sobbed together, shared our fears and tears, and drew
comfort from each other. When the inevitable physical
responses occurred, we coupled there in our bubble without
releasing each other and shared our joy as well.
Contact! Prepare for take-off! Sweet.
I smiled and shook my head. "Just remembering when we met."
OK, since I cannot repeat things that have been said before, I'll
refrain from commenting on the jarring change. However, I find this
almost as negative - he's lieing. that's my gut reaction.
Intelectually, I cannot verify that. But the abrupt change, the day
dream prior to, and this obvious prevarication just doesn't work for
me.
The other negative: The initial piece was just a bit too surreal for
my tastes.
Hammon Wry.
From: Tesseract
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 24 Jul 2002 00:37:09 -0700
Good story. I liked the surreal imagery. Unlike some other peopl, I
liked the ending. His dream was interrupted; his bubble burst. It is
supposed to be abrupt.
You could have been a bit more descriptive about sex in the bubble,
since it was completed and not interrupted by ending the dream.
The listing of similar incidents: The Prisoner, Heinlein Clancy, I
thought was a bit overdone. Maybe if they were introduced one at a
time with more action between them it might work better.
" ... to properly make love" is the correct phrase. Gary knows this.
The following is for those that think otherwise.
First up is the spilt infinitive. The rule about not splitting
infinitives was devised by Latin scholars trying to force Latin
grammar onto English. It is impossible to split infinitives in Latin
as the infinitive is one word. These anal scholars, in their attempt
to impose their blinkered view onto the rest of the world, decreed
that the infinitive should not be split in English, thus attempting to
hobble this more modern language with deficiencies of the older.
To artistically split the infinitive is one way to explore the
richness of English. Who can forget that famous split infinitive,"To
boldly go where no man has gone before."?
In this particular case "it takes way more than an hour to make love
properly" suggests that without an hour you are not making love, that
it is impossible to make love in less time. Whereas "it takes way more
than an hour to properly make love" suggest that, yes, you could do it
in less time, but, to wring the maximum benefit from the exercise
requires much more than an hour. The first puts the emphasis on 'make
love', the second puts it on "properly'.
After I learn to write, I may figure out how to end these sermons
properly.
Tesseract
From: Bradley Stoke
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 24 Jul 2002 03:07:00 -0700
Gary
A delightful little tale. A little bit spooky and a little bit odd,
but in the end reassuring and life enhancing. I wasn't sure how
literal the bubble was meant to be or whether it existed wholly within
the protagonist's imagination, but that ambiguity isn't a bad thing.
The thing I liked most about the story was the physical sensation of
being in a bubble. It's not something I've had direct experience of,
but it felt real enough. And it's true that when you're in a bad or
troubling situation you often find reassurance in something as
emotionally neutral and engaging as doing calculations. How often has
the time spent in hospital receptions been spent calculating the
approximate size of the universe? Or how many seconds you've lived
already?
I liked the way in which the protagonist rationalised the situation,
by reference to the books he's read (though it could just as easily
have been the films he'd seen). We do that don't we? It's the modern
condition. Everything is related to something else. Like the first
time you travel by plane as a child, you relate everything to Star
Trek. And you're disappointed by how small police telephone boxes are
on the inside.
I wasn't too sure about the purpose of the bubble. And this is my
first suggestion for improvement. It's a nice symbol and it brings the
story to a nice conjunction with the protagonist's wife, but I wasn't
sure what it was symbolic of. Perhaps there is no purpose to the
symbol. Maybe it isn't a metaphor for the imprisoned soul (whether
called "Number Six" or whatever), but it'd be more satisfying I think
if there were something to relate the bubble to. If it's meant to
represent the confinement of a rewarding marriage with a
self-confessed "nerd", then that doesn't seem a particularly bad
confinement to me.
I wasn't sure how the end of the story fit with everything. " A
lifetime might not be long enough." And "it takes way more than an
hour to properly make love". I like what's being said about
contingency, and this is a very special relationship indeed where an
hour is not enough (that's often rather more than you need). But I'm
not sure it emerged naturally from the image of the bubble.
I enjoyed the story, and my criticisms are not to say the story was in
any sense lacking in imagery, structure, description, pace or
whatever. All of which it has in spades. Just that it could be even
better.
Bradley Stoke
For More : http://www.asstr.org/~Bradley_Stoke
From: Ray
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 26 Jul 2002 10:28:18 -0700
This week in the FishTank we have two offerings for the anniversary. This
first submission is a complete story that addresses what it's like to wake
up in a bubble. It is 935 words. FishTank guidelines apply:
1) 2 positive comments
2) 2 suggestions for improvement
3) Try not to repeat!
FishTank submissions and comments are being stored at:
http://www.asstr.org/~Desdmona/FishTank/base
Questions? Concerns? Suggestions? Submissions? Direct them to:
************************************************************
Fish Tank: Tiny Bubbles
by Gary Jordan [email protected]
I woke up naked, in The Bubble. I don't know what else to
call it. I was surrounded by a spherical envelope. I
couldn't see anything at all beyond its boundaries, but a
dim light seemed to shine through the walls from every
direction. Maybe the walls were the light source. I couldn't
tell.
I like the description above ... No hints of color or lack
of color, merely an opaque light emitting or passing shell
and an establishment of the utter isolation.
I tried running, jumping, crawling, anything to create an
effect that might change my perceptions. I always ended up
at the bottom of The Bubble. That was when my panic started.
Again, reaffirming the isolation and hints of the desperation
one might feel in a completely unchanging environment with
only limited sensory input.
I'm neither a genius nor an idiot. Just average, I guess,
but I liked to read, and I probably watched too much TV. My
imagination began to run away with me. I remembered an old
show called "The Prisoner" where these white bubble things
chased people, and some guy kept insisting he wasn't a
number. Was this that kind of bubble? And there was a
Heinlein story where a guy investigating paranormal
phenomena gets sucked into a fish tank. Would I have to
scratch, "Creation took eight days" on my thigh with
fingernail shards to alert humanity that we had owners?
Then there was a Clancy novel where the KGB broke an agent
using sensory deprivation. Except my senses weren't
completely deprived. I could see myself, I could feel
myself. I could, measure my heart rate and hear my own
voice and breathing.
Okay .... I know that I'm not supposed to repeat, but there
are too many references crammed together. Possibly, if you
had spread them out a bit in a type of "time passing and I
just remembered fashion"
.... I paced myself with the beat of every song I could
think of - anything to remain active. If I used up all the
air, fine - it was going to happen anyway.
Considering your earlier references, you missed a bet here
by not having him suddenly realise he was replaying the
"Twilight Zone Theme" over and over in his head <g>
When the new, larger Bubble stabilized, I pulled my head
back to see what - or who - I was attached to. She was the
most beautiful woman I had - have - ever seen. Somewhere in
the rational recesses of my mind, some objective snippet of
brain admitted not Sophia Loren beautiful, nor Meg Ryan
pretty. Maybe not even handsome. But to the rest of me, she
was goddess gorgeous. Looking into her eyes, I could tell
she felt the same about me.
I put my head against her neck and clung with all my might.
We sobbed together, shared our fears and tears, and drew
comfort from each other. When the inevitable physical
responses occurred, we coupled there in our bubble without
releasing each other and shared our joy as well.
I'm not sure I completely agree with the others about an
expansion of the 'sex', though I do believe there should
have been at least impressions from the feel of her body
touching his .... the feel of a breast here, the soft curve
of her belly there, a muscular leg intertwined with your
own, the feel of - or lack of feeling of pubic hair ... or
the hair from her head laying across your shoulder or neck.
I also felt there should have been a small mention of their
rising and walking hand in hand. Rather than simply
clinging to one another and waiting for "the end" ...
I smiled and shook my head. "Just remembering when we met."
"When we were assigned as lab partners in the Industrial
Petrochemistry class?" Desdmona grinned. "What a couple of
nerds we were."
Ahem .... Correct me if I'm wrong here .... the woman in
the bubble was Desdmona (see above) .... and you describe
her as "not Sophia Loren Beautiful," "Not Meg Ryan pretty,"
and "maybe not even handsome?" Glad I'm not you <G>
I grinned. I couldn't help it. I grabbed her hand to pull
her toward the bedroom, but she pulled me there just as
hard. I agreed about the hour, but it's what we had for
now. A lifetime might not be long enough.
Great ending.
Ray
From: Mat Twassel
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 26 Jul 2002 20:13:00 GMT
I like the setup. I like that they met as lab partners in the Petrochemistry
class. But I want to know more about those bubbles coming together, and what
it's like coupling in the bigger bubble, and what makes the bubble pop. I
think there's room for all that and still have Desdmona snap her fingers. I'd
also like to see some suggestion of the bubble's reemergence at the end.
- Mat Twassel
Mat's Erotic Calendar at http://calendar.atEros.com
From: PleaseCain
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 26 Jul 2002 22:09:33 GMT
What a cool story. I don't know if it's a metaphor or what, but it's highly
imaginative and effective, his perplexing situation and the wonderful contact
that finally comes to him. His thinking felt genuine in the isolation. Their
appreciation of each other at the end of his reverie also provides a warm
contrast to his nightmare. Including a few sensory details would make it even
more powerful: was he cold in his bubble? did he for the first time experience
utter silence? what did the bubble feel like under his feet? did her body feel
warm against his? does he want to cry when she holds him as desperately as he
clings to her? does he smell his wife's cologne or chewing gum, that provides
an instant vibrancy missing in his sterile bubble?
Repeating earlier comments here, but I think you should ground the dreamy
sequences a bit more in his personality, or his life history or situation. One
token might do it, like the cane in "Miracle on 34th Street." Think of "The
Wall" by Pink Floyd, how it's one long nightmare, and yet the substance of his
visions is taken from the details of life. I didn't feel cheated by his
awakening, but only offer this as a means to strengthen.
Some of the punctuation is inconsistent. I'm not crazy about the title - how
does the adjective "tiny" relate at all to the story, and why throw the reader
by invoking that song (it's impossible not to think of it)? A few of the
sentences at key moments read clunky:
"[Holding on to anything not me was an incredibly
welcome change from the isolation of the Bubble], and I swore
I would never let go."
"Somewhere in the rational recesses of my mind, [some objective snippet of
brain admitted not Sophia Loren beautiful, nor Meg Ryan
pretty]."
Thank you so much for sharing this with us. Creative writing like this really
stokes me. The story was a pleasure.
Cain
From: Tesseract
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 1 Aug 2002 22:04:35 -0700
No one taught me about split infinitives. I learned about them and
many other grammar points afterwards, on my own.
As I was going through school, the curriculum was being revised.
People that had gone before told me that high school had two English
courses: English Literature (?) and English Grammar. By the time I got
to high school there was only one English course, and possibly an
elective English Lit course at the senior level - I don't recall; all
my electives were math and science.
Different schools, different teachers, and the all-important
"improved new-tech teaching methods" which somehow fail to get the
basic info across better than the old-fashioned ways ;-)
Did I mention the curriculum was being revised? I think they used
words like 'new', 'improved', 'better', 'student oriented', 'whole
language'. They weren't trying to get the basic info across better;
they weren't trying to get the basic info across at all. I think we
were supposed to absorb it through osmosis.
Let's see, I had junior Lit (same class as senior year), creative
writing (fantasy and sci-fi mostly), American lit (USA gets to promote
its own stuff), and I believe a general English class for 9th grade.
The important grammar stuff was kicked in much earlier.
My formal grammar instruction started in grade one, and progressed
through grade five. It covered spelling and basic sentence
construction. We learned about the period, then the question mark.
Next came the comma. We were introduced to the exclamation mark and
warned not to over use it. By grade four or five we were told about
the semicolon, enough to recongnize it but we weren't given much
instruction on actually using it. We were given even less information
about the colon and the dash (for the longest time I thought it was
called a hyphen and was the same symbol as used in hyphenated words -
which were covered as spelling). Somewhere along the way we were told
about quotation marks and given a lot of instruction about them. They
were used to mark off direct quotes, but not indirect quotes. The
attribution (that word was not used) was separated from the quote with
a comma. A new speaker gets a new paragraph. If the same speaker
continues into a following paragraph the first paragraph was not ended
with a quotation mark but the second paragraph was started with one.
I'm sure we were told about some other rules as well.
Yeah, by 6th grade you should have lots of basics. All of them, I
think.
Some of the grammar vocabulary I picked up includes: noun, pronoun,
article, verb, adjective, adverb, subject, predicate, verb phrase,
adverb phrase, adjective phrase. I think tense came up at some time.
What was not covered was object. I'm sure the concept was covered but
that word was not used. Nor was infinitive, split or otherwise.
Neither was conjunction nor preposition.
Hmm, seems to me that little red grammar book we had in 5th/6th
grade covered that. Plus similar things following up through 10th
(sophomore year, age 15).
We never had a grammar book, red or otherwise. The closest was a
pamphlet/booklet thingy at university (59� or $1.49 or there abouts)
to explain the instructors' marks. He seldom used these marks so I
seldom looked into this booklet. But never in K-12 school.
I studied French for a few years in high school and learned more
formal grammar there than in English class. In particular I learned
about objects and transitive and intransitive verbs. Also verb
conjugation. And tenses, though we only learned how to form some of
them in French. I learned the word 'infinitive', though the concept of
split infinitive only came up in passing when we were told it was
impossible to write, for example, "to boldly go" because "to go" was
one word in French and there was no way to stick something into the
middle of 'aller'. No judgement was given about it's use in English.
Foreign languages I think help point out more about structure,
because you must consciously think about grammar rather than simply
write how you talk.
In high school English various grammar points were covered as they
arose, but seldom using the formal language of grammar. I think this
was where the decline of 'whom' started. Teachers weren't telling us
how to use it, so we didn't use it and now the word is almost dead.
Was still taught when I was in school. But my favorite English
teacher was probably 70 or so, and hadn't forgotten how the language
really works.
We didn't cover any grammar in the required one year of University
English. I guess the instructor (we got a TA, not a prof) thought we
were sufficiently literate to not need it.
By University, spelling and grammar are either known, or irrelevant.
Seems to me that Mark Twain had something to say about that once.
I learned much more afterwards, by reading about language and writing
- for some strange reason I have an interest in it, though I wouldn't
consider myself a write, at least not a fiction writer. I also learned
a lot by following up grammar references I find in groups such as
this.
As I've mentioned before, I think my high school English instruction
was deficient.
Of course. It is darned hard to teach high school kids anything
they don't want to learn. Not that they shouldn't try, but you can
only go so far in remedial teaching in a mainstream class. Those who
know the structure already only need brushups.
It was not remedial, and it wasn't a continuation of earlier grammar
instruction. It became English Lit. In Grade 9 we dissected
Hemmingway's "The Old Man and the Sea". Did he really put all that
symbolism in, or was the teacher finding things that he did not
intend?
I fear that too much of current primary teaching misses that
essential. A given teacher can make up for it. There really isn't
that much you have to learn, not if you count spreading it over 5
grades (kindergarten for spoken, 1-4 for primary language skills).
5th and 6th grade, you should be using full language forms, reading
and writing anything. We had classic literature, Shakespeare (now,
there is a test for vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation), and modern
fiction - plus news periodicals read in class.
Now, as a "good" student I may have missed how some other kids didn't
learn those things. But they were most definitely taught to us.
I was also a good student. Best in math and science but above average
in English, and I was paying attention so I know what was taught,
regardless of whether I actually learned it.
Tesseract
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 00:37:03 -0600
No one taught me about split infinitives. I learned about them and
many other grammar points afterwards, on my own.
As I was going through school, the curriculum was being revised.
People that had gone before told me that high school had two English
courses: English Literature (?) and English Grammar. By the time I got
to high school there was only one English course, and possibly an
elective English Lit course at the senior level - I don't recall; all
my electives were math and science.
Different schools, different teachers, and the all-important
"improved new-tech teaching methods" which somehow fail to get the
basic info across better than the old-fashioned ways ;-)
Did I mention the curriculum was being revised? I think they used
words like 'new', 'improved', 'better', 'student oriented', 'whole
language'. They weren't trying to get the basic info across better;
they weren't trying to get the basic info across at all. I think we
were supposed to absorb it through osmosis.
Which comes down to learning it at home, or someplace outside of
school.
Funny thing is, the basic language hasn't changed that much in a
very long time. Coming to grips with the illogic of certain word
forms is one thing, but ignoring that there is a logical structure
behind it all is another.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/
For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Gary Jordan
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 03 Aug 2002 08:14:02 GMT
No one taught me about split infinitives. I learned about them and
many other grammar points afterwards, on my own.
As I was going through school, the curriculum was being revised.
People that had gone before told me that high school had two English
courses: English Literature (?) and English Grammar. By the time I got
to high school there was only one English course, and possibly an
elective English Lit course at the senior level - I don't recall; all
my electives were math and science.
Different schools, different teachers, and the all-important
"improved new-tech teaching methods" which somehow fail to get the
basic info across better than the old-fashioned ways ;-)
Did I mention the curriculum was being revised? I think they used
words like 'new', 'improved', 'better', 'student oriented', 'whole
language'. They weren't trying to get the basic info across better;
they weren't trying to get the basic info across at all. I think we
were supposed to absorb it through osmosis.
Which comes down to learning it at home, or someplace outside of
school.
Funny thing is, the basic language hasn't changed that much in a
very long time. Coming to grips with the illogic of certain word
forms is one thing, but ignoring that there is a logical structure
behind it all is another.
I was a product of parachial school through the eighth grade. Sister Eugene
Loyola. Sister Mary Seraphim. Sister Ethelbert. Sister Whacknuckles (okay, I
forget her name, but not her ruler). Whatever else may be said of Catholic
schools, their curriculum included firm grounding in English, Math and Science.
I did learn the split infinitive rule, and by eighth grade learned that it
could occasionally be violated (and was provided with many samples where it
successfully was).
The other thing I remember from parachial school was the lay teachers ...
Das peekentubenfallen.
Gary Jordan
"Old submariners never die; they just don't get to go down as often."
<I>"This communicating of a man's self to his friend works two contrary
effects, for it redoubleth joys, and cutteth griefs in half." - Francis Bacon,
Essays </I>
From: Lisala
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 08:48:21 -0700
I did learn the split infinitive rule, and by eighth grade learned that it
could occasionally be violated (and was provided with many samples where it
successfully was).
Absolutely - the "to boldly split" or "not to split" preference is a
matter of usage and style, not one of grammar. That is, it is not an
inherent structure of English that - and in fact, even in Old English,
the infinitive is often "split."
I've always been fond of Fowler's view on the question;
25. 'SPLIT' INFINITIVES
The 'split' infinitive has taken such hold upon the consciences of
journalists that, instead of warning the novice against splitting his
infinitives, we must warn him against the curious superstition that the
splitting or not splitting makes the difference between a good and a
bad writer.
You can read more here:
http://www.bartleby.com/116/503.html
But the The American Heritage Book of English Usage. A Practical and
Authoritative Guide to Contemporary English. 1996. has some good
things to say too:
http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/059.html
To boldly go where no one has gone before. This phrase, so familiar to
Star Trek fans, presents us with the dilemma of the split infinitive�an
infinitive that has an adverb between the to and the verb. Split
infinitives have been condemned as ungrammatical for nearly 200 years,
but it is hard to see what exactly is wrong with saying to boldly go.
Its meaning is clear. It has a strong rhythm than reinforces the
meaning. And rearranging the phrase only makes it less effective. We
may also want to go boldly where no one has gone before, but it doesn�t
sound as exciting. And certainly no one wants to go where no one has
gone before boldly. That is a different voyage entirely. 1
In fact, the split infinitive is distinguished both by its length of
use and the greatness of its users. People have been splitting
infinitives since the 14th century, and some of the most noteworthy
splitters include John Donne, Samuel Pepys, Daniel Defoe, Benjamin
Franklin, Samuel Johnson, William Wordsworth, Abraham Lincoln, George
Eliot, Henry James, and Willa Cather. 2
The only rationale for condemning the construction is based on a
false analogy with Latin. The thinking is that because the Latin
infinitive is a single word, the English infinitive should be treated
as if it were a single unit. But English is not Latin, and people split
infinitives all the time without giving it a thought. Should we condemn
compound infinitives, such as I want to go and have a look, simply
because the infinitive have has no to next to it? 3
Still, if you dislike infinitives split by adverbs, you can often
avoid them without difficulty. You can easily recast the sentence To
better understand the miners� plight, he went to live in their district
as To understand the miners� plight better, he went to live in their
district. But as we saw with the Star Trek example, you must be careful
not to ruin the rhythm of the sentence or create an unintended meaning
by displacing an adverb. 4
If you plan on keeping your split infinitives, you should be wary of
constructions that have more than one word between to and the verb. The
Usage Panel splits down the middle on the one-adverb split infinitive.
Fifty percent accept it in the sentence The move allowed the company to
legally pay the employees severance payments that in some cases
exceeded $30,000. But only 23 percent of the panel accepts the split
infinitive in this sentence: We are seeking a plan to gradually,
systematically, and economically relieve the burden. The panel is more
tolerant of constructions in which the intervening words are intrinsic
to the sense of the verb. Eighty-seven percent of the panel accepts the
sentence We expect our output to more than double in a year. 5
Remember too that infinitive phrases in which the adverb precedes a
participle, such as to be rapidly rising, to be clearly understood, and
to have been ruefully mistaken, are not split and should be acceptable
to everybody. And don�t be deceived by to-constructions with a gerund,
as in He is committed to laboriously assembling all of the facts of the
case. Here what is split is not an infinitive but a prepositional
phrase. 6
From: cmsix
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 16:24:11 GMT
Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage says: "Split them when you need
to .... The objection to the split infinitive has never had a rational
basis."
cmsix
This is the sort of English up with which I will not put. - Winston
Churchill
I did learn the split infinitive rule, and by eighth grade learned that
it
could occasionally be violated (and was provided with many samples where
it
successfully was).
Absolutely - the "to boldly split" or "not to split" preference is a
matter of usage and style, not one of grammar. That is, it is not an
inherent structure of English that - and in fact, even in Old English,
the infinitive is often "split."
I've always been fond of Fowler's view on the question;
25. 'SPLIT' INFINITIVES
The 'split' infinitive has taken such hold upon the consciences of
journalists that, instead of warning the novice against splitting his
infinitives, we must warn him against the curious superstition that the
splitting or not splitting makes the difference between a good and a
bad writer.
You can read more here:
http://www.bartleby.com/116/503.html
But the The American Heritage Book of English Usage. A Practical and
Authoritative Guide to Contemporary English. 1996. has some good
things to say too:
http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/059.html
To boldly go where no one has gone before. This phrase, so familiar to
Star Trek fans, presents us with the dilemma of the split infinitive >
infinitive that has an adverb between the to and the verb. Split
infinitives have been condemned as ungrammatical for nearly 200 years,
but it is hard to see what exactly is wrong with saying to boldly go.
Its meaning is clear. It has a strong rhythm than reinforces the
meaning. And rearranging the phrase only makes it less effective. We
may also want to go boldly where no one has gone before, but it doesn�t
sound as exciting. And certainly no one wants to go where no one has
gone before boldly. That is a different voyage entirely. 1
In fact, the split infinitive is distinguished both by its length of
use and the greatness of its users. People have been splitting
infinitives since the 14th century, and some of the most noteworthy
splitters include John Donne, Samuel Pepys, Daniel Defoe, Benjamin
Franklin, Samuel Johnson, William Wordsworth, Abraham Lincoln, George
Eliot, Henry James, and Willa Cather. 2
The only rationale for condemning the construction is based on a
false analogy with Latin. The thinking is that because the Latin
infinitive is a single word, the English infinitive should be treated
as if it were a single unit. But English is not Latin, and people split
infinitives all the time without giving it a thought. Should we condemn
compound infinitives, such as I want to go and have a look, simply
because the infinitive have has no to next to it? 3
Still, if you dislike infinitives split by adverbs, you can often
avoid them without difficulty. You can easily recast the sentence To
better understand the miners� plight, he went to live in their district
as To understand the miners� plight better, he went to live in their
district. But as we saw with the Star Trek example, you must be careful
not to ruin the rhythm of the sentence or create an unintended meaning
by displacing an adverb. 4
If you plan on keeping your split infinitives, you should be wary of
constructions that have more than one word between to and the verb. The
Usage Panel splits down the middle on the one-adverb split infinitive.
Fifty percent accept it in the sentence The move allowed the company to
legally pay the employees severance payments that in some cases
exceeded $30,000. But only 23 percent of the panel accepts the split
infinitive in this sentence: We are seeking a plan to gradually,
systematically, and economically relieve the burden. The panel is more
tolerant of constructions in which the intervening words are intrinsic
to the sense of the verb. Eighty-seven percent of the panel accepts the
sentence We expect our output to more than double in a year. 5
Remember too that infinitive phrases in which the adverb precedes a
participle, such as to be rapidly rising, to be clearly understood, and
to have been ruefully mistaken, are not split and should be acceptable
to everybody. And don�t be deceived by to-constructions with a gerund,
as in He is committed to laboriously assembling all of the facts of the
case. Here what is split is not an infinitive but a prepositional
phrase. 6
The web site does not currently support submitting comments
on stories. If you want to join in the discussion on this
story, come to the thread in alt.sex.stories.d and post
a follow-up.
Note that all the comments archived here were culled from
active discussions occuring in the Usenet newsgroup
alt.sex.stories.d.
If you want to contribute to the discussion, please join
us in ASSD and say your piece. Everyone is welcome.
If you do not know how to read Usenet newsgroups, there is
a nice web interface on Google:
http://groups.google.com/.
If you have any problems,
send us email.
If we're lucky, we'll get you set up and contributing in no
time!
If you have not done so, please read the
Comment Guidelines. We ask that all comments include two
positive remarks and two suggestions for improvement.
Please, try not to repeat!
Comments on Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan.
The separator between the comment pane and the story pane is moveable. Drag it up or down if you need more room to read on the screen.
From: Souvie
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:05:28 GMT
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:30:45 -0400, "Desdmona" <[email protected]> wrote:
Positive: Okay, maybe it's just me, but this part struck me as very vivid and very funny:
Positive: And this part went very well with the whole beginning of the story:
Improvement: I couldn't find anything overall to improve so I'm resorting to being nitpicky.
There shouldn't be a comma before the word "because."
Improvement: And no comma after the word "could" in this sentence:
Overall, an enjoyable story that really played with my imagination. :)
- Souvie
From: john
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 22 Jul 2002 22:10:51 -0700
For a "day"dream it's quite elaborate; for any dream its way ingenious. The fact it takes up 84.3% of the story is, I think, a problem that needs a little work. The fact that it's so clever (not to mention the quality of the writing which not surprisingly is excellent) is certainly its strength. There is very little, though, that bridges the giant dream to the sliver of reality; it hardly seems fair. The reader hunkers down (in my case a little reluctantly) to something sci fi and starts believing in the plot, just starts caring about the conflict, when - bam - the bubble bursts and s/he must shift into a charming slice of family romance. I'd be wont to blow a technical - but loath to do it since there's so damn much flair. The reality is just as apple pie as the fantasy is off the wall in centre field. I think one needs a seatbelt for this one; it jars. Still a little queasy, after I'd got both feet safely on the ground, I liked it very much.
Thnak you, Gary!
John
From: dennyw
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 03:30:54 -0700
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 22:05:28 GMT, [email protected] (Souvie) held forth, saying:
One quibbly thing: I've never known anyone who'd say 'to properly make love' - but I have known those who'd say, 'to make love properly.'
-denny- (curmudgeon)
"There are two tragedies in life.
One is to lose your heart's desire. The other is to gain it." - G.B. Shaw
From: Hammon Wry
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 11:47:29 GMT
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 03:30:54 -0700,
[email protected] wrote:
I haven't read the story, but consider this: If the above sentance is spoken out loud, the word "properly" takes on a special emphasis if placed before "make love", even without using any extra stress. Especially if you add a US southern dialect drawl to it.
Hammon Wry
Thinks the most beauriful sounding sentance fragment in the English language is: "The rose of sharon in bloom by the cellar door"
Erotica should be spoken out loud.
From: dennyw
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:20:18 -0700
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 11:47:29 GMT, Hammon Wry <[email protected]> held forth, saying:
Why ever not? It's shortish, and your comments would no doubt be interesting. <thinks: that's what the FT is for, after all>
-denny- (curmudgeon)
"There are two tragedies in life.
One is to lose your heart's desire. The other is to gain it." - G.B. Shaw
From: Hammon Wry
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:13:57 GMT
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:20:18 -0700,
[email protected] wrote:
Be happy to, if you'd provide me with direction on locating the Fish Tank.
Hammon Wry
From: Vinnie Tesla
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 02:05:48 GMT
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:13:57 GMT, quoth the Hammon Wry <[email protected]>:
To mangle Mephistopheles:
The Fishtank has no limits, nor is circumscrib'd In one self place; for where we are is the Fishtank, And where the Fishtank is there must we ever be.
Or, more concisely, you're lookin' at it.
Or, more confusingly, http://www.asstr.org/~Desdmona/FishTank/base/
Clarify!? Waddaya mean I gotta clarify?
Oh, fine. Spoil my fun.
Desdmona posts Fishtank stories each week to ASSD, where anyone who wants to can critique them. Periodically, she archives those critiques at the above website for the edification of posterity.
So, if you want to critique a Fishtank story, by all means go ahead and do so. If you want to submit something to the 'Tank (everything so far has been fiction, but I'm confident poetry would be fine too), send it to Des, and she'll put it in the queue.
-Vinnie
[email protected]
http://www.asstr.org/~vinnie_tesla/
He polishes birds of the Vista
From: Desdmona
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 08:01:59 -0400
"Vinnie Tesla" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] ...
Thanks Vinnie, I think you summed up nicely!
Des
Send FishTank story submissions, questions, comments to [email protected] or [email protected].
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:39:24 -0500
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 03:30:54 -0700,
[email protected] wrote:
I have. Maybe it comes from the northern/eastern european roots, I don't know for sure. Some local grammatic structures are like classic cases of odd dialect (not just accents).
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Leowulf
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 16:01:48 -0000
"Desdmona" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
Well told, building suspense and resolution in a Twilight Zone sort of way. The setting is minimalist enough to focus the reader's attention on the meeting of the bubble people; by the time it happens, the reader cares enough about the protagonist to make the union powerful from an emotional perspective.
The teasing aspect of the story, building to a sex scene in the bubble that is then denied the reader is a good technique. It builds interest and tension, making the reader want more of the story
<in Marvin the Martian's voice> "Where's the sex scene? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering sex scene!" Ending the story on the way to the bedroom makes it a great teaser, but some in-story sex would also have made a fun resolution to the tale.
I was going to give you some sewing thread to repair the infinitive that the protagonist's wife split, but somebody else already mentioned it. <g>
It's too hard not to! :) the story was a great teaser - I loved it!
Leowulf
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 20:23:30 -0500
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:30:45 -0400, "Desdmona" <[email protected]> wrote:
This is a tricky one to comment on. The whole bubble thing is very nicely done. Dreamy-real, giving insight into the character in an interesting setting. I'm not energetic enough to pick through for picky editorial technical details :-) but there isn't much else.
OK, I know it is trying to be short, but I've often found that the dreamy sex bits seem to drag on a while. Not always, depends on mood or whatever, but I seem to notice a few more details. Maybe Gary doesn't want to show them in this story, but a little bit more - even a bit of recognition of the advantage that mutual nudity has on making an acquaintance - would make it feel better.
Now, of course she' s right, and he knows that too. But one of the quick discoveries made about having kids is that a nice hour is better than the longer time which might not come for a few days (or for those of us who don't mind getting little sleep, until nightfall ;-)
It does make me wonder just what happened when they met. The bubble situation seems kind of unlikely as a "real" thing, you know?
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Hammon Wry
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 02:40:37 GMT
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:30:45 -0400, "Desdmona" <[email protected]> presented in the Fish Tank: Tiny Bubbles by Gary Jordan
My two praises:
yes, I have blown bubbles. This is a lovely bit, and I find it oddly evocative of erotic. I guess it's the old "merging two into one" metaphore.
Contact! Prepare for take-off! Sweet.
OK, since I cannot repeat things that have been said before, I'll refrain from commenting on the jarring change. However, I find this almost as negative - he's lieing. that's my gut reaction. Intelectually, I cannot verify that. But the abrupt change, the day dream prior to, and this obvious prevarication just doesn't work for me.
The other negative: The initial piece was just a bit too surreal for my tastes.
Hammon Wry.
From: Tesseract
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 24 Jul 2002 00:37:09 -0700
"Desdmona" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]> ...
Good story. I liked the surreal imagery. Unlike some other peopl, I liked the ending. His dream was interrupted; his bubble burst. It is supposed to be abrupt.
You could have been a bit more descriptive about sex in the bubble, since it was completed and not interrupted by ending the dream.
The listing of similar incidents: The Prisoner, Heinlein Clancy, I thought was a bit overdone. Maybe if they were introduced one at a time with more action between them it might work better.
" ... to properly make love" is the correct phrase. Gary knows this. The following is for those that think otherwise.
First up is the spilt infinitive. The rule about not splitting infinitives was devised by Latin scholars trying to force Latin grammar onto English. It is impossible to split infinitives in Latin as the infinitive is one word. These anal scholars, in their attempt to impose their blinkered view onto the rest of the world, decreed that the infinitive should not be split in English, thus attempting to hobble this more modern language with deficiencies of the older.
To artistically split the infinitive is one way to explore the richness of English. Who can forget that famous split infinitive,"To boldly go where no man has gone before."?
In this particular case "it takes way more than an hour to make love properly" suggests that without an hour you are not making love, that it is impossible to make love in less time. Whereas "it takes way more than an hour to properly make love" suggest that, yes, you could do it in less time, but, to wring the maximum benefit from the exercise requires much more than an hour. The first puts the emphasis on 'make love', the second puts it on "properly'.
After I learn to write, I may figure out how to end these sermons properly.
Tesseract
From: Bradley Stoke
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 24 Jul 2002 03:07:00 -0700
Gary
A delightful little tale. A little bit spooky and a little bit odd, but in the end reassuring and life enhancing. I wasn't sure how literal the bubble was meant to be or whether it existed wholly within the protagonist's imagination, but that ambiguity isn't a bad thing.
The thing I liked most about the story was the physical sensation of being in a bubble. It's not something I've had direct experience of, but it felt real enough. And it's true that when you're in a bad or troubling situation you often find reassurance in something as emotionally neutral and engaging as doing calculations. How often has the time spent in hospital receptions been spent calculating the approximate size of the universe? Or how many seconds you've lived already?
I liked the way in which the protagonist rationalised the situation, by reference to the books he's read (though it could just as easily have been the films he'd seen). We do that don't we? It's the modern condition. Everything is related to something else. Like the first time you travel by plane as a child, you relate everything to Star Trek. And you're disappointed by how small police telephone boxes are on the inside.
I wasn't too sure about the purpose of the bubble. And this is my first suggestion for improvement. It's a nice symbol and it brings the story to a nice conjunction with the protagonist's wife, but I wasn't sure what it was symbolic of. Perhaps there is no purpose to the symbol. Maybe it isn't a metaphor for the imprisoned soul (whether called "Number Six" or whatever), but it'd be more satisfying I think if there were something to relate the bubble to. If it's meant to represent the confinement of a rewarding marriage with a self-confessed "nerd", then that doesn't seem a particularly bad confinement to me.
I wasn't sure how the end of the story fit with everything. " A lifetime might not be long enough." And "it takes way more than an hour to properly make love". I like what's being said about contingency, and this is a very special relationship indeed where an hour is not enough (that's often rather more than you need). But I'm not sure it emerged naturally from the image of the bubble.
I enjoyed the story, and my criticisms are not to say the story was in any sense lacking in imagery, structure, description, pace or whatever. All of which it has in spades. Just that it could be even better.
Bradley Stoke
For More : http://www.asstr.org/~Bradley_Stoke
From: Ray
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 26 Jul 2002 10:28:18 -0700
"Desdmona" <[email protected]> wrote in message
I like the description above ... No hints of color or lack of color, merely an opaque light emitting or passing shell and an establishment of the utter isolation.
Again, reaffirming the isolation and hints of the desperation one might feel in a completely unchanging environment with only limited sensory input.
Okay .... I know that I'm not supposed to repeat, but there are too many references crammed together. Possibly, if you had spread them out a bit in a type of "time passing and I just remembered fashion"
Considering your earlier references, you missed a bet here by not having him suddenly realise he was replaying the "Twilight Zone Theme" over and over in his head <g>
I'm not sure I completely agree with the others about an expansion of the 'sex', though I do believe there should have been at least impressions from the feel of her body touching his .... the feel of a breast here, the soft curve of her belly there, a muscular leg intertwined with your own, the feel of - or lack of feeling of pubic hair ... or the hair from her head laying across your shoulder or neck.
I also felt there should have been a small mention of their rising and walking hand in hand. Rather than simply clinging to one another and waiting for "the end" ...
Ahem .... Correct me if I'm wrong here .... the woman in the bubble was Desdmona (see above) .... and you describe her as "not Sophia Loren Beautiful," "Not Meg Ryan pretty," and "maybe not even handsome?" Glad I'm not you <G>
Great ending.
Ray
From: Mat Twassel
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 26 Jul 2002 20:13:00 GMT
I like the setup. I like that they met as lab partners in the Petrochemistry class. But I want to know more about those bubbles coming together, and what it's like coupling in the bigger bubble, and what makes the bubble pop. I think there's room for all that and still have Desdmona snap her fingers. I'd also like to see some suggestion of the bubble's reemergence at the end.
- Mat Twassel
Mat's Erotic Calendar at http://calendar.atEros.com
From: PleaseCain
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 26 Jul 2002 22:09:33 GMT
What a cool story. I don't know if it's a metaphor or what, but it's highly imaginative and effective, his perplexing situation and the wonderful contact that finally comes to him. His thinking felt genuine in the isolation. Their appreciation of each other at the end of his reverie also provides a warm contrast to his nightmare. Including a few sensory details would make it even more powerful: was he cold in his bubble? did he for the first time experience utter silence? what did the bubble feel like under his feet? did her body feel warm against his? does he want to cry when she holds him as desperately as he clings to her? does he smell his wife's cologne or chewing gum, that provides an instant vibrancy missing in his sterile bubble?
Repeating earlier comments here, but I think you should ground the dreamy sequences a bit more in his personality, or his life history or situation. One token might do it, like the cane in "Miracle on 34th Street." Think of "The Wall" by Pink Floyd, how it's one long nightmare, and yet the substance of his visions is taken from the details of life. I didn't feel cheated by his awakening, but only offer this as a means to strengthen.
Some of the punctuation is inconsistent. I'm not crazy about the title - how does the adjective "tiny" relate at all to the story, and why throw the reader by invoking that song (it's impossible not to think of it)? A few of the sentences at key moments read clunky:
"[Holding on to anything not me was an incredibly welcome change from the isolation of the Bubble], and I swore I would never let go."
"Somewhere in the rational recesses of my mind, [some objective snippet of brain admitted not Sophia Loren beautiful, nor Meg Ryan pretty]."
Thank you so much for sharing this with us. Creative writing like this really stokes me. The story was a pleasure.
Cain
From: Tesseract
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 1 Aug 2002 22:04:35 -0700
Jeff Zephyr <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]> ...
...
Did I mention the curriculum was being revised? I think they used words like 'new', 'improved', 'better', 'student oriented', 'whole language'. They weren't trying to get the basic info across better; they weren't trying to get the basic info across at all. I think we were supposed to absorb it through osmosis.
We never had a grammar book, red or otherwise. The closest was a pamphlet/booklet thingy at university (59� or $1.49 or there abouts) to explain the instructors' marks. He seldom used these marks so I seldom looked into this booklet. But never in K-12 school.
It was not remedial, and it wasn't a continuation of earlier grammar instruction. It became English Lit. In Grade 9 we dissected Hemmingway's "The Old Man and the Sea". Did he really put all that symbolism in, or was the teacher finding things that he did not intend?
I was also a good student. Best in math and science but above average in English, and I was paying attention so I know what was taught, regardless of whether I actually learned it.
Tesseract
From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 00:37:03 -0600
On 1 Aug 2002 22:04:35 -0700, [email protected] (Tesseract) wrote:
Which comes down to learning it at home, or someplace outside of school.
Funny thing is, the basic language hasn't changed that much in a very long time. Coming to grips with the illogic of certain word forms is one thing, but ignoring that there is a logical structure behind it all is another.
Jeff
Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/
There is nothing more important than petting the cat.
From: Gary Jordan
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: 03 Aug 2002 08:14:02 GMT
Das peekentubenrisen.
So anyway Jeff goes:
I was a product of parachial school through the eighth grade. Sister Eugene Loyola. Sister Mary Seraphim. Sister Ethelbert. Sister Whacknuckles (okay, I forget her name, but not her ruler). Whatever else may be said of Catholic schools, their curriculum included firm grounding in English, Math and Science.
I did learn the split infinitive rule, and by eighth grade learned that it could occasionally be violated (and was provided with many samples where it successfully was).
The other thing I remember from parachial school was the lay teachers ...
Das peekentubenfallen.
Gary Jordan
"Old submariners never die; they just don't get to go down as often." <I>"This communicating of a man's self to his friend works two contrary effects, for it redoubleth joys, and cutteth griefs in half." - Francis Bacon, Essays </I>
From: Lisala
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 08:48:21 -0700
In article <[email protected]>, Gary Jordan <[email protected]> wrote:
Absolutely - the "to boldly split" or "not to split" preference is a matter of usage and style, not one of grammar. That is, it is not an inherent structure of English that - and in fact, even in Old English, the infinitive is often "split."
I've always been fond of Fowler's view on the question;
25. 'SPLIT' INFINITIVES
The 'split' infinitive has taken such hold upon the consciences of journalists that, instead of warning the novice against splitting his infinitives, we must warn him against the curious superstition that the splitting or not splitting makes the difference between a good and a bad writer.
You can read more here:
http://www.bartleby.com/116/503.html
But the The American Heritage Book of English Usage. A Practical and Authoritative Guide to Contemporary English. 1996. has some good things to say too:
http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/059.html
To boldly go where no one has gone before. This phrase, so familiar to Star Trek fans, presents us with the dilemma of the split infinitive�an infinitive that has an adverb between the to and the verb. Split infinitives have been condemned as ungrammatical for nearly 200 years, but it is hard to see what exactly is wrong with saying to boldly go. Its meaning is clear. It has a strong rhythm than reinforces the meaning. And rearranging the phrase only makes it less effective. We may also want to go boldly where no one has gone before, but it doesn�t sound as exciting. And certainly no one wants to go where no one has gone before boldly. That is a different voyage entirely. 1
In fact, the split infinitive is distinguished both by its length of use and the greatness of its users. People have been splitting infinitives since the 14th century, and some of the most noteworthy splitters include John Donne, Samuel Pepys, Daniel Defoe, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Johnson, William Wordsworth, Abraham Lincoln, George Eliot, Henry James, and Willa Cather. 2
The only rationale for condemning the construction is based on a false analogy with Latin. The thinking is that because the Latin infinitive is a single word, the English infinitive should be treated as if it were a single unit. But English is not Latin, and people split infinitives all the time without giving it a thought. Should we condemn compound infinitives, such as I want to go and have a look, simply because the infinitive have has no to next to it? 3
Still, if you dislike infinitives split by adverbs, you can often avoid them without difficulty. You can easily recast the sentence To better understand the miners� plight, he went to live in their district as To understand the miners� plight better, he went to live in their district. But as we saw with the Star Trek example, you must be careful not to ruin the rhythm of the sentence or create an unintended meaning by displacing an adverb. 4
If you plan on keeping your split infinitives, you should be wary of constructions that have more than one word between to and the verb. The Usage Panel splits down the middle on the one-adverb split infinitive. Fifty percent accept it in the sentence The move allowed the company to legally pay the employees severance payments that in some cases exceeded $30,000. But only 23 percent of the panel accepts the split infinitive in this sentence: We are seeking a plan to gradually, systematically, and economically relieve the burden. The panel is more tolerant of constructions in which the intervening words are intrinsic to the sense of the verb. Eighty-seven percent of the panel accepts the sentence We expect our output to more than double in a year. 5
Remember too that infinitive phrases in which the adverb precedes a participle, such as to be rapidly rising, to be clearly understood, and to have been ruefully mistaken, are not split and should be acceptable to everybody. And don�t be deceived by to-constructions with a gerund, as in He is committed to laboriously assembling all of the facts of the case. Here what is split is not an infinitive but a prepositional phrase. 6
From: cmsix
Re: Tiny Bubbles, by Gary Jordan
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 16:24:11 GMT
Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage says: "Split them when you need to .... The objection to the split infinitive has never had a rational basis."
cmsix
This is the sort of English up with which I will not put. - Winston Churchill
"lisala" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:030820020848211091%[email protected] ...
infinitive that has an adverb between the to and the verb. Split
Submitting new story comments
The web site does not currently support submitting comments on stories. If you want to join in the discussion on this story, come to the thread in alt.sex.stories.d and post a follow-up.
Note that all the comments archived here were culled from active discussions occuring in the Usenet newsgroup alt.sex.stories.d. If you want to contribute to the discussion, please join us in ASSD and say your piece. Everyone is welcome.
If you do not know how to read Usenet newsgroups, there is a nice web interface on Google: http://groups.google.com/. If you have any problems, send us email. If we're lucky, we'll get you set up and contributing in no time!
If you have not done so, please read the Comment Guidelines. We ask that all comments include two positive remarks and two suggestions for improvement. Please, try not to repeat!